Israel

Fox News has a deep bench of repulsive characters to call upon whenever they need to insult President Obama or lie about a progressive initiative that would help the nation. But perhaps the most noxious of the bunch is Col. Ralph Peters, a man who has distinguished himself as a world-class Obama hater.

Ralph Peters (whose name translates to “vomiting penises” in Slanglish) is the purveyor of some truly nauseating notions that include: advocating military strikes on the American media; that there aren’t enough civilian casualties in war; that the U.S. should be more like ISIS; that the Taliban should have been allowed to execute an American soldier; and many more horrendous pronouncements.

The latest Peterism is a nearly incomprehensible perversion of an old proverb that goes “The enemy of my enemy is friend.” Its plain meaning is that two parties with a common foe have good reason to unite in order to achieve victory. But last night on Sean Hannity’s program Peters, cribbing off of Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech before Congress, turned this into a slap at Obama saying that…

“Obama is incapable of learning […] For Americans, the most important point that Bibi Netanyahu made today was that in the Middle East today, dealing with Iran and Islamic State, ‘The enemy of my enemy is my enemy.’ Obama just can’t figure that out.”

Neither can any other person with functional cognitive abilities. Let’s break it down. The enemy, in this case, can be presumed to be the so-called Islamic State. IS has many enemies, but for this demonstration we’ll just pick one, say…England. Therefore, if the enemy (England) of my enemy (IS) is my enemy, then England is my enemy. And that would go for just about every western nation, as well as many Middle Eastern nations. That’s how pathetically shallow the thought processes are for Peters and Netanyahu and the terrorist enablers at Fox News.

Peters went on to dig deep into Obama’s soul and dredge up what he thinks our President feels about the fate of Israel. Never mind that Obama has repeatedly stated that Israel’s security is of paramount interest to the national security of the United States and that America will always defend Israel and its right to exist, Peters ralphed up this vile commentary without any support other than his she-male intuition:

“Obama is so desperate, so desperate, for this deal for his legacy, that he is willing to give Israel up. Let’s face it, if Israel disappeared from the face of the Earth tomorrow Obama would not shed a tear.”

Remember, Peters is the cretin who wouldn’t shed a tear for American journalists and soldiers, and civilians of any nationality, who are killed by the terrorist military policies he would impose on U.S. forces. It’s people like Peters who are the real enemies of peace because they hunger so fiercely for the blood of their perceived foes. His philosophy is one of perpetual war and demonization of those he regards as alien to his ideal of Euro-supremacy. That poisonous creed needs to be eradicated from the world and the eradication needs to start with Fox News.

OK, first of all this is not an article about the tragic conflict in the Middle East that has been raging for decades. There will be no taking of sides or opinionating on blame. This is about how Fox News purposefully contorts their coverage to make President Obama look bad. Of course, that isn’t exactly breaking news either.

The headline at the top of the lie-riddled Fox Nation website purports to convey a warning from Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to President Obama: “Netanyahu to White House: Don’t Second Guess Me Again.” There are a couple of problems with that headline. First of all, Netanyahu did not direct that comment to the White White House. He was on a conference call with the diplomats at the State Department. Secondly, it was not a warning. It was more of an I-told-you-so relating to the recent 72 hour cease fire that Hamas violated within ninety minutes. Netahyahu was making the point that he was correct when he expressed doubts about the trustworthiness of Hamas.

But what really stands out is that Fox News chose to feature this remark on Sunday in their most prominent position while failing to even report another comment from Netanyahu. The “second-guess” comment occurred on Friday. On Saturday Netanyahu held a news conference where he delivered a very different message:

“In a news conference Saturday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israel would take all the time it needs to eradicate the threat of Hamas from Gaza. He did not mention the scheduled truce talks but did say the U.S. has been “terrific and has given us tremendous support during the Gaza crisis.”

Fox News made an editorial decision to keep this statement of solidarity and appreciation a secret from their audience. It’s just another reason why their audience is so dreadfully ignorant of the world around them. But it isn’t surprising for Fox News. They have long sought to invent some sort of animosity between Obama and Netanyahu. Here are just a few of their recent headlines:

This isn’t a coincidence. It’s a strategy. Fox News is so determined to demean our President that they don’t care if doing so undermines U.S. foreign policy or exacerbates the harm to victims of a brutal war. That tells you something about where Fox’s priorities lie.

If you’ve ever wondered where Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, and other News Corp properties get their tone of division and hatred, you need look no further than the corporation’s head, Rupert Murdoch. On Saturday Murdoch sought to express his disagreement with coverage of the escalating violence in Israel. But his tweets on the subject reveal more about him than anything else.

Murdoch began by criticizing CNN and the Associated Press for what he called “bias to the point of embarrassment.” It was difficult to ascertain what he meant because he offered no examples of the alleged bias. However, he later seemed to make clear what he regarded as the problem when he tweeted his complaint that the “Jewish owned press [is] so consistently anti-Israel.”

The outrageous offensiveness of that remark is its obvious link to derogatory, anti-Semitic assertions that the media is run by Jews. It’s a demonstrably false assertion that is commonly used by hate groups and was exploited to tragic effect in Nazi Germany. For Murdoch to use this sort of language against his competitors is further evidence that he is unfit to lead an international news enterprise.

In between the tweets mentioned above, Murdoch inserted an equally offensive tweet aimed at President Obama wherein he attributed the shelling of Israel to Obama’s “friends” in Egypt. For Murdoch to suggest that the Hamas terrorists (who, by the way, are not in Egypt) are friends of the President goes far beyond what can be considered civil discourse. Murdoch is effectively accusing Obama of complicity with the attacks on Israel. That is the sort of repulsive and delusional opinion one would expect to hear at a KKK rally.

There are some who believe that Murdoch has been a stalwart defender of Israel, however, there is a big difference between pro-Israel and pro-Jewish. Murdoch, like many neo-con right-wingers, is only supportive of Israel in connection with the right’s strident Islamophobia. They hate Muslims so much that they embrace Israel to the extent that they can exploit its conflicts with the Muslim world, and particularly Iran, with whom they are itching to go to war. But there is nothing remotely pro-Jewish about that stance. It is similar to the apocalyptic Christians who pretend to support Jews, but only because they are a necessary component of the End Times prophesies, after which they will burn in Hell.

On Sunday morning Murdoch became aware of the criticism of his tweets and posted another that entirely missed the point saying: “Jewish owned press” have been sternly criticised, suggesting link to Jewish reporters. Don’t see this, but apologise unreservedly.

There are two glaring problems with that absurd attempt at a public relations fix. First, the criticism had nothing to do with reporters, but with his reference to Jewish “owners” of the media. Secondly, how can he claim to “apologise unreservedly” when he admits that he doesn’t see any reason for the criticism? It is an utterly disingenuous apology that doesn’t even address the insult.

Rupert Murdoch is a vile man filled with hatred and greed. He should do himself, his business, and the world a favor by stepping down as CEO and Chairman of News Corp and fade ignobly into history.

After insulting the British, Mitt Romney jetted off to the Middle East and promptly insulted Palestinians. The frequency with which Romney creates international incidents is more than slightly suggestive of his unfitness to serve as president. And his proclivity for such gaffes begs for a new word to describe his imploding diplomacy, which I am calling “Implomacy.”

This time Romney was attempting to praise Israel as a prosperous and productive nation, but in his inimitably derisive manner, Romney approached the subject from a direction that portrayed Palestinians as inferior culturally.

Romney: Culture makes all the difference. […] As you come here and you see the GDP per capita, for instance, in Israel which is about $21,000 dollars, and compare that with the GDP per capita just across the areas managed by the Palestinian authority, which is more like $10,000 per capita, you notice such a dramatically stark difference in economic vitality. […] And as I come here and I look out over this city and consider the accomplishments of the people of this nation, I recognize the power of at least culture and a few other things.

Let’s set aside for the moment that Romney badly misstated the economic facts. According to the World Bank, in 2011 Israel’s GDP was $31,000 per capita, compared to just over $1,500 in the West Bank and Gaza. But the bigger problem with Romney’s remarks is that they are an affront to people who do not have control over their economy. Israel enforces severe restrictions on the territories inhabited by Palestinians. Granted, they may have good cause considering the threat of attacks that have originated from those territories, but the resultant economic conditions can hardly be attributed to any cultural shortcomings on the part of the Palestinian people. The inappropriateness of Romney’s comments are evident if you take the same comments and replace the names of those involved. For instance…

As you come here and you see the median household income, for instance, in Beverly Hills which is about $96,000 dollars, and compare that with the median income just across town in Watts, which is more like $25,000, you notice such a dramatically stark difference in economic vitality. […] And as I come here and I look out over this city and consider the accomplishments of the people of this nation, I recognize the power of at least culture and a few other things.

Would Romney suggest that the residents of Watts are culturally inferior? Or Harlem? Or Mississippi? Does he notice a “dramatically stark difference” in the vitality of residents of Greenwich, CT, as compared to those in West Virginia?

If Romney were to have said something along these lines he would have certainly forfeited the votes of those communities. The problem with his doing it in Israel is that, were he president, he could fatally harm the efforts to bring the region to a negotiated peace. As it stands now, how willing do you think the Palestinians would be to trust Romney to be a fair dealer in future peace talks?

This is not a trivial political dust-up. Lives hang in the balance. And Romney is proving that his hamfisted boorishness is too dangerous to take a chance on. He continues to make us wonder who means by “us.”

Next week Glenn Beck will take his hate crusade to Israel, a nation that does not want him there and fears that his presence can only inflame tensions and create division. Beck is a proud enemy of peace with Palestine and rejects negotiated settlements with people he regards as heathens. As the date for Beck’s hatefest nears, more Israelis are speaking out against him:

“There are enough racists in Israel without importing them from the US,” Hadash MK Muhammad Barakei said. […] “There is a danger that the event will lead to people being harmed, and the police should have prevented it,” Barakei added.

MK Ahmed Tibi (UAL-Ta’al) called Beck “a bizarre, conservative, neo-fascist comedian who is motivated by a hatred of Islam.”

The danger that Beck may set off violence in Israel is not anecdotal. He has certainly set off violence in the United States. And the threat of violence was even acknowledged by Beck’s own security team when they advised him to change the original location of the rally due to security concerns. Ironic, isn’t it, that Beck should have to move his “Restoring Courage” rally because he’s afraid of violence.

Since then Beck has continued spewing rhetoric that can only incite more anger. The Christian Science Monitor reports that last week Beck insulted hundreds of thousands of Israelis who were protesting the lack of affordable housing. He implied that they were radical leftists and communists. In fact, polls show 87% of the population agreed with the protesters. This strident disrespect for the people of the nation he is visiting is not being well received. A well known conservative Israeli published an editorial criticizing both Beck and the local rightists who support him:

“[N]ow that Beck has spoken before the Knesset and is given the green light in the staging of his ‘Courage’ rally, he believes he has earned the right to pontificate about all matters Israeli. Specifically, he has called the current ‘tent city’ protests in Tel Aviv and other locations the doing of ‘communists,’ calling into question the financing of these protests and suggesting a sinister connection between the protesters in Israel and world socialism, framing the whole matter in the context of the sort of anarchists who protest G-8 meetings, and squeezing the square peg of what should be an internal Israeli matter into the round hole of his us-and-them, liberal-versus-conservative worldview. Whether he is right or not, let him go on back to where he came from and stick to things he might actually know a thing or two about, and let Jews and Israelis handle Jewish and Israeli matters.”

Finally, Beck’s event may not be getting much traction. Reports from the region suggest that he is being forced to take measures to prevent the whole affair from being a monumental embarrassment. Also from the CSMonitor:

“There are signs that Beck is struggling to promote his event. Writing on the left-leaning 972 blog, Mya Guarnieri notes an online ad seeking foreign citizens to act as ambassadors to ‘stand with Israel’ at the Aug. 24 event. She responded to an e-mail on the ad asking if participants would be paid for acting as ambassadors, and writes that a senior aide to Likud lawmaker Danny Danon responded, ‘depends where you are from.’ Mr. Danon is a Beck fan.”

Beck speaks so often of the risks he undertakes to spread his vile message that it would not be surprising to learn that he is hoping for trouble, and even encouraging it. He has literally alerted his audience to the prospect that he could be assassinated and enlisted them in an effort to make sure he is avenged. He has accused the Obama administration of plotting to kill him, and George Soros as well. His obsession with imagined assassins is pure Messianic delusion. He has had this to say about his Israeli Escapade:

“Will my event hurt foreign policy of the U.S.? I damn well hope so now.”
“If Israel falls the western way of life falls. That’s not hyperbole.”
“This may be it for our generation or for all mankind.”
“I will stand, I will speak, and in the end, if it be His will, I will die right alongside my brother.”

Let’s just hope that he doesn’t try to carry out his demented prophecy in a manner that harms the innocent.